Content deleted Content added
→General Expansion and cleanup: Refactoring |
Tag: |
||
(35 intermediate revisions by 21 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{Talk header}}
{{Notice|{{find sources}}}}
{{WikiProject
{{WikiProject
{{WikiProject Companies|importance=low}}
}}
== Criticism ==
OK, it's locked. But is there really a "latte grade"? Sorry Starbucks. <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/208.125.68.34|208.125.68.34]] ([[User talk:208.125.68.34#top|talk]]) 21:58, 15 November 2019 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
Some of the criticisms section seems reasonable, but the article is written partly in the second person and the length of the section suggests serious bias on the part of the author. More balance would be helpful. [[User:D-Clancy|D-Clancy]] 04:32, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
Line 25 ⟶ 28:
::I just now reverted to a previous edit, taking out some parts of the Restoration vs. Conservation section. The material that was put back in is, in some cases, redundant. Moreover, it's not necessary to quote an entire reference. If the reader wants to check it out, that's what the link is for. Making the article more succinct (without losing the point) is better for the article. Also, we really need to avoid making the article conversational and informal. It is an encyclopedia, after all. There should never be a sentence starting with the word "Update", for example. Respectfully, [[User:GentlemanGhost|GentlemanGhost]] 07:47, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
The information in this page is misleading. CGC grades counterfeit books. [[User:Cy-Fi|Cy-Fi]] ([[User talk:Cy-Fi|talk]]) 20:33, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
Why the blatant puffery? "This is another valuable service as a good counterfeit can be hard to detect even by a trained eye." <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/208.125.68.34|208.125.68.34]] ([[User talk:208.125.68.34#top|talk]]) 18:30, 30 September 2020 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
== Internet partners and link ==
Line 127 ⟶ 134:
== POV check template ==
Looks like there's been a template on the article for quite some time about possible POV problems. Are there still concerns with the article? <
:Hi Shell, I overlooked your message the last time I edited this page. Sorry about that. I think that the POV concerns have pretty much been addressed. But I have been loathe to remove the POV tag as I'm trying to avoid even the appearance that I think that I "own" the article. To that end, I had solicited feedback from WikiProject Comics and from an RfC. Initially, the article didn't get much attention, but lately it seems like more people are noticing it, which is great. As far as further improvements, there's still the matter of including exact quotes within the references, several of which stretch the boundaries of what is normally considered a reliable source. But on the POV issue, I think the article is much closer to a neutral point of view than it was a year ago. Someone other than me has removed the POV tag and I think that makes sense. Naturally, the article will continue to evolve and removing the tag does not mean that further improvements cannot be made. Thanks for taking an interest! --[[User:GentlemanGhost|GentlemanGhost]] ([[User talk:GentlemanGhost|talk]]) 22:54, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Line 147 ⟶ 154:
== Protection ==
Since we seem to be back to a spate of IP addresses who have a bone to pick with the subject and continue to reinsert material against clear consensus, I've semi-protected for a bit. <
== The "Green Label" section ==
Line 161 ⟶ 168:
::If the unconfirmed signature is on the cover of the book, it gets a Green label. If it's inside/on the first page, it gets a Blue label. It's been that way for years. This, and a whole lot more info (like the letter grades, see below) used to be available here, but these anal OCD sufferers live for literal interpretaion of the rules. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:209.247.22.101|209.247.22.101]] ([[User talk:209.247.22.101|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/209.247.22.101|contribs]]) 01:58, 10 May 2009</span><!-- Template:Unsigned2 -->
:::That is useful information. It just needs to be [[WP:RS|reliably sourced]]. That has nothing to do with obsessive-compulsive disorder or anal retentiveness, just basic encyclopedic [[WP:V|verifiability]]. — <
It was reliably sourced, the information came directly from the president of CGC. These guys just pick and choose what rules to enforce when, when it suits them. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/66.217.176.6|66.217.176.6]] ([[User talk:66.217.176.6|talk]]) 12:21, 18 July 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
Line 173 ⟶ 180:
== Missing an obvious and major criticism ==
One of the most obvious criticisms is that the CGC practice is the ultimate objectification and de-artification of the comic/magazine being graded, because it is sealed permanently and will never be read/viewed again except for the cover. All of the story and interior art are essentially sealed forever for all intents and purposes, as if there were no writer or non-cover artists. One might as well just encase it in Lucite like a bug in amber. — <
:If someone has made that remark in a reliable source, I'm all for its inclusion. --[[User:GentlemanGhost|GentlemanGhost]] ([[User talk:GentlemanGhost|talk]]) 20:18, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
Line 180 ⟶ 187:
==Anti-criticism bias==
Coming back a month and half after I last commented, the piece still appears to be written to lend CGC an imprimatur of acceptance and authoritativeness that it doesn't really have. There are a large number of criticisms from a large number of critics. I've been collecting for 30ish years and I can't even begin to estimate the number of collectors who feel that CGC and its few imitators are a terrible idea, rip offs, a grievous insult to everyone but the cover artists, easy to fool, a cynical way to make a quick buck off of collectors who don't know better, grotesquely skewing comics values, causing older comics to be less critically graded, and so on, and so forth. While the "Criticisms" section hasn't been deleted again lately, and I think it's important that the lead itself continue to note that the company and the idea are controversial, the Overstreet quote in the lead isn't reliable, as he is not an independent source, but takes lots and lots of advertising money from them, has worked directly with them (some say effectively under their thumb) to revise the comics grading standards to the new 3rd Edition specifications, and otherwise has direct ties to the company. His statement is comparable to a paid "blurb" on the back of a paperback novel. How many comic stores don't even carry any CGC items at all (other than recent acquisitions that happened to come in with a purchased collection)? {{em|Lots}} of them. The article of course should not be an attack piece, but it shouldn't be a puff piece either. And I've seen up above that there's been some disputation, with some editors saying online forums cannot be used as sources here, at all, ever. This isn't actually true. An online forum can easily and obviously be a [[WP:RS|reliable source]] (sometimes the most reliable) for the fact that a controversy exists and what its details are, when it is a live record of that controversy in action. They just aren't reliable for statements of fact that need independent verification, like how CGC operates, what its revenues are, etc. — <
:If you look back at previous iterations of the article, it was basically a slam piece against CGC. I've tried to bring it back to a neutral point of view.
Line 230 ⟶ 237:
GentlemanGhost, you make an excellent point. I'll look into the references, just want to make sure they support the information. I am fine with the overall concept of the criticisms, but the section needs work. Some of the information appears to be an elaboration or paraphrase of something from a CGC forum and is a double fault as a forum is being heavily used for a reference and that forum falls into the [[ WP:PRIMARY| Primary sources]] realm. --[[User:0pen$0urce|0pen$0urce]] ([[User talk:0pen$0urce|talk]]) 22:24, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
:I've added back one message board thread which was used as a citation in two places. Please see what you think. --[[User:GentlemanGhost|GentlemanGhost]] ([[User talk:GentlemanGhost|talk]]) 03:18, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
Here is Wikipedia's policy on self-published sources:
----
'''Self-published and questionable sources as sources on themselves''' (Shortcut: [[WP:SELFSOURCE]])
Self-published or questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, especially in articles about themselves, without the requirement that they be published experts in the field, so long as:
#the material is not unduly self-serving;
#the material does not involve claims about third parties (such as people, organizations, or other entities);
#the material does not involve claims about events not directly related to the subject;
#there is no reasonable doubt as to the authenticity and source of the material;
#the article is not based primarily on such sources.
----
The CGC message boards count as a self-published source. As such, we can use information from these message boards within the limits described above. The article has already been changed to address at least one complaint about on the self-serving point. If we do use the CGC message boards as a source, we should only use messages from CGC employees that pertain to their company, not those which make claims about third parties, such as customers or other companies. And, as stated, the article needs to be based primarily on reliable sources, not self-published sources. On this count, the article has been fairly lopsided. Adding more information from the NY Times article or the Chicago article (or new articles) would help to balance this out, as would reducing the amount of detail in the criticism section which is based on the message boards. --[[User:GentlemanGhost|GentlemanGhost]] ([[User talk:GentlemanGhost|talk]]) 22:42, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
===General Expansion and cleanup===
Line 240 ⟶ 265:
Well you obviously have an agenda and thus why you are here, I advise reading [[NPOV]] which is the root of all edits. Much of the criticisms is un-sourced or very poorly sourced from blogs. I can create a blog to either drum up or complain about anything, however that does not merit it being reference worthy. Not everyone knows about the benefits, that just furthers your agenda. Sorry you don't like CGC, sorry you don't like Wizard, this is not the place to promote opinion. Again [[NPOV]],Also consider making a registered account, your IP is posted which is ill advised. [[User:0pen$0urce|0pen$0urce]] ([[User talk:0pen$0urce|talk]]) 17:41, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
:Wow, I thought you were an idiot before, but if you think the CGC Board is comparable to a blog, you've surpassed my expectations (and you haven't done your homework, even those initially opposed now admit it is credible, read above). And if you think PGX is comparable to CGC, well then, you're in the stratosphere! [[Special:Contributions/
::[[WP:CIV|Civility]], no need to be a coward name call and hide behind a New Britain, Connecticut IP.--[[User:0pen$0urce|0pen$0urce]] ([[User talk:0pen$0urce|talk]]) 20:26, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
== Edit request on 16 March 2012 ==
Line 252 ⟶ 278:
[[Special:Contributions/62.107.114.13|62.107.114.13]] ([[User talk:62.107.114.13|talk]]) 21:22, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
:No objections, so {{removed}} — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 20:52, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
== Hello? ==
Is anybody going to add to or fix this page? Certainly you heard the big Classics Inc/CGC announcement. Plus, the page is really lame, you're missing a bunch of good info. I'd do it myself but, you know, the Nazis got me. You guys talk big but it's time to put your money where your mouth is. Do something! <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/66.217.176.2|66.217.176.2]] ([[User talk:66.217.176.2|talk]]) 21:05, 24 November 2012 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Ooh, neat! [[Godwin's law]] gets proven again. --[[User:GentlemanGhost|<span style="color: green;">GentlemanGhost</span>]] [[User talk:GentlemanGhost|<span style="color: green;">(converse)</span>]] 22:21, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
And all you've done is prove what a retarded mongoloid you are. All you do is yap yap yap, never contributing anything to this page. You know nothing about CGC apparently, so the only way to feel superior is to edit important stuff out. You're part of the problem... <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/66.217.176.8|66.217.176.8]] ([[User talk:66.217.176.8|talk]]) 19:26, 7 April 2014 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
Instead of quoting things that are not relevant to the article (Godwin's law), could you reply to the original question? Does this need to be addressed to someone else in the wikipedia structure who can give a competent answer? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/24.74.72.198|24.74.72.198]] ([[User talk:24.74.72.198|talk]]) 22:13, 1 May 2014 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
== Semi-protected edit request on 1 May 2014 ==
{{edit semi-protected|Comics Guaranty|answered=yes}}
<!-- Begin request -->
A signed book has the potential to valued more than the same book in equal condition
should be ( could someone fix the grammar? )
A signed book has the potential to be valued more than the same book in equal condition
<!-- End request -->
[[Special:Contributions/24.74.72.198|24.74.72.198]] ([[User talk:24.74.72.198|talk]]) 22:08, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
:[[File:Yes check.svg|20px|link=]] '''Done'''<!-- Template:ESp --> [[WP:MINOR|Minor edit]] only. —<span style="color:#808080">[[User:Kuyabribri|'''KuyaBriBri''']]</span><sup><span style="color:#008080">[[User_Talk:Kuyabribri|''Talk'']]</span></sup> 02:20, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
== Semi-protected edit request on 28 November 2018 ==
{{edit semi-protected|Comics Guaranty|answered=yes}}
Hi. I work for CGC Comics and we would like to remove any reference to our company President as it is inaccurate. The reference appears in two places (see below).
1) "The company was launched in early 2000 and has since gone on to become a notable part of the comic book collecting community. CGC's current President, Mark Haspel, is also the company's primary grader.[2]"
You could change it to ""The company was launched in early 2000 and has since gone on to become a notable part of the comic book collecting community."
2) "Key people Mark Haspel (President)[1]"
Please just remove the reference as CGC does not currently have a President position.
Also, please remove "18 years ago" after "Founded January 4, 2000; 18 years ago" located in the upper right corner of the page by our logo where the second time the name Mark Haspel appears (see below).
Type Private
Industry Collectibles
Founded January 4, 2000; 18 years ago
Parsippany, New Jersey, U.S.
Headquarters Sarasota, Florida, U.S.
Area served
Worldwide
Key people Mark Haspel (President)[1]
If you need further information I can be reached at lauries@cgccomics.com
Thank you!
Laurie [[User:Lsan242|Lsan242]] ([[User talk:Lsan242|talk]]) 21:15, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
:[[File:Yes check.svg|20px|link=|alt=]] '''Done'''<!-- Template:ESp --> Notwithstanding the requestor's declared COI, the requested edit makes sense and checks out with the references that were on the article. —<span style="color:#808080">[[User:Kuyabribri|'''KuyaBriBri''']]</span><sup><span style="color:#008080">[[User_Talk:Kuyabribri|''Talk'']]</span></sup> 14:35, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
== Semi-protected edit request on 11 October 2019 ==
{{edit semi-protected|Comics Guaranty|answered=yes}}
Hello, I'm a CGC representative requesting that "Comics Guaranty" be changed to "Certified Guaranty Company". This appears to be correct everywhere except for the very top title section for the company. Thanks! [[User:JSnyderCGCComics|JSnyderCGCComics]] ([[User talk:JSnyderCGCComics|talk]]) 15:33, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
:[[File:Move-protection-shackle.svg|20px|link=|alt=]] '''[[Wikipedia:Protection policy#Move protection|Not done]]:''' page move requests should be made at [[Wikipedia:Requested moves]].<!-- Template:ESp --> [[User:OhKayeSierra|OhKayeSierra]] ([[User talk:OhKayeSierra|talk]]) 01:06, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
== Semi-protected edit request on 20 October 2020 ==
CGC has been banned from E4 due to Astroturfing. Please see evidence: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKSXBt-AXCo&ab_channel=SolemnYuGiOh , https://efour.proboards.com/thread/21152/cgc-employees-astroturfing-e4?page=4 , https://the-comic-book-forum.boards.net/thread/1615/cgc-employees-permanently-banned-astroturfing?page=1&scrollTo=84480 <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/2600:1702:1FC0:2480:4DCD:8668:54B8:EA2F|2600:1702:1FC0:2480:4DCD:8668:54B8:EA2F]] ([[User talk:2600:1702:1FC0:2480:4DCD:8668:54B8:EA2F#top|talk]]) 18:27, 20 October 2020 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
== Requested move 10 November 2020 ==
<div class="boilerplate" style="background-color: #efe; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px dotted #aaa;"><!-- Template:RM top (modified) -->
:''The following is a closed discussion of a [[WP:requested moves|requested move]]. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a [[Wikipedia:move review|move review]] after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. ''
----
<span id="reqmovetag"></span>{{check talk wp}}
{{Tmbox
|small =
|imageright =
|type = move
|text = '''It was proposed in this section that [[:Comics Guaranty]] be [[Wikipedia:Moving a page|renamed and moved]] to {{no redirect| Certified Guaranty Company }}.'''
----
<small>'''{{smallcaps|result:}}'''</small><br />'''Moved.''' No objections raised; treating as a [[WP:BOLD]] move. <small>([[Wikipedia:Requested moves/Closing instructions#Closure by a page mover|closed by non-admin page mover]])</small> -[[User:2pou|2pou]] ([[User talk:2pou|talk]]) 21:59, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
----
<div class="floatleft">''Links:'' [{{fullurl:Special:Log/move|page={{Urlencode:Comics Guaranty}}}} current log] • [{{fullurl:Special:Log/move|page={{Urlencode: Certified Guaranty Company }}}} target log] • [{{fullurl:Special:MovePage|wpOldTitle={{Urlencode:{{ARTICLEPAGENAME}}}}&wpNewTitle={{Urlencode: Certified Guaranty Company }}&wpReason={{Urlencode:[[Wikipedia:Requested moves|requested move]]; consensus at [[{{TALKPAGENAME: Certified Guaranty Company }}]]}}&wpMovetalk=1}} direct move]</div>
<div class="floatright">{{resize|65%|''This is template {{tls|Requested move/end}}''}}</div>
<!-- This is template "subst:Requested move/end". -->
}}
[[:Comics Guaranty]] → {{no redirect|Certified Guaranty Company}} – This is the correct name of the company that this article is about (see https://www.CGCcomics.com). It also follows the style within Wikipedia of the page names for CGC's coin-grading affiliate, Numismatic Guaranty Corporation (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numismatic_Guaranty_Corporation), as well as NGC's chief competitor, Professional Coin Grading Service (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_Coin_Grading_Service). All three of these companies authenticate, grade and encapsulate collectibles. [[User:Limeparade|Limeparade]] ([[User talk:Limeparade|talk]]) 15:11, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
----
: ''The discussion above is closed. <b style="color: #FF0000;">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.''<!-- from [[Template:Archive bottom]] -->
</div><div style="clear:both;"></div>
== Collecting or selling my comic books you once asked me! ==
I emailed your company at one point or another asking cgc how exactly I go about grading my comic books that I own in my collection at one point or another I owned the world's finest comics issue 73 through 323. And Adventure Comics 155 to 490, and I wanted advice on how exactly to grade my comic books through cgc. And furthermore I can't believe I would be asked if I'm going to keep them or if I'm going to be selling them. What difference does it make if I intend to keep them or sell them? Furthermore since when should I subscribe to your website in order to grade a comic book in my collection since I'm having to pay for the comic book to be graded to begin with having to pay a subscription fee for you to do your job seems ridiculous to me. And when does it take 11 months to a year and a half for an individual trained and certified by cgc to grade comic books? Had it took me 11 months to a year and a half to do my job I'd be fired. Then again I probably wouldn't be here right now I'd probably be dead because I was a soldier in Afghanistan as an Army Ranger. And furthermore how many comic books do you grade per day I know I'm curious to know as well as other people, and how is it that comic book stores online are coming across comic books that are sold and very fine condition I often wonder to myself, if perhaps cgc or other comic book grading companies are opening unclaimed comic books that were sent in to be graded. And cgc is sending these comic books individual businesses opening up selling them to us once again only to be resubmitted to faten their pockets, with a fresh submittal fee to not only faten their pockets but the business as well. And I have one other question for cgc cbcs and PGX and my question is if Gary Moser is indicted by the FBI for trimming baseball cards that is considered a hobby is it not but he did it for a financial gain through PSA I get it hey sports card grading company. So when does it become so coincidental that you are able to do the same exact thing to somebody's intellectual property such as a comic book in their collection by trimming it adding color touch, or even trimming only one side of the comic book I've seen stuff happen with cdc's grading that I often wonder to myself if they come up with new scenarios of how to screw over the little man. This is why a dear friend of mine who has passed away recently his name is Neal Adams, once said to me he frowned upon cgc and everything they have done to the industry he worked for he didn't understand why everybody deserved a golden star book why couldn't it be graded for as it lied and why is it that pressing a comic book is not restoration of a comic book are you not manipulating the way the grade is going to be, to increase the value just like Gary Moser? So I wonder first who gave you permission when you are not on the cover as a artist not as the anchor or the writer of the comic book not even the comic book industry DC Marvel has authorized you to do such a thing I bet you artists don't even know that you're doing this thing to their books because I've asked a few of them and they don't know this is going down! And why is it that you charge such a ridiculous amount of money to grade a comic book but you don't have a authenticator to authenticate a signature on site guess what if I submit a sports card to tops or upper deck at signed by Joe Montana they have a signature authenticator on Deck but you don't, why is that? You would think because you're part of the collectibles grading group you would think that you'd have the same standards as PSA Beckett as anyone else who grades cards or comic books and furthermore why is there no price guide for your purple label your green label comic books furthermore I don't think there's a price guide that's free to the general public for even Blue label books people say use eBay, use Heritage auctions. Well if Heritage auctions banned you from using their account how do you price your items are they the ones who make the overstreet price guide so if they put a ban on your account from being able to value your items then how does one get the value of their comic book? And it's sad to say that I've owned in my collection several vintage video games being a collector of all things being told by individuals for certain companies you have nothing to value when obviously you do have stuff about you and you going to approach these individuals, and they know your vulnerable because your father had just passed away they know you're disabled and they scrutinize you verbally attack you make you feel less than human this nation I want served as an Army Ranger I couldn't believe my ears. Is this the America I swore to protect is this the America you people stand behind people who antagonize victimized and attack disabled Rangers with TBI and PTSD? Why would we give any of these people our money whenever they can't even give you an honest grade? And why is it that CDC has a term to use for the person grading the comic book such as amateur grader, intermediate grader, professional grader? Why is it necessary for you to charge me 10% of the comic book value if it is so scarce and so vintage such as Superman #1 Batman #1 only for you too place it in a 7.5 graded purple label intermediate graded stating that it needed only the right side page two and three trimmed do you know who's comic book you happen to have grade during this time that individual I believe he said he was 11 years old when you bought that book that was his inspiration to go into the comic book industry to draw Batman at a later time in his life his name is Neal Adams, Neal Adams owned a comic book store as well he also sold on eBay. And furthermore worked all the way to the day he died did he get paid like he should have? He got paid just as much maybe a little bit more by a few thousand dollars as much as a school lunch lady! And doing something he enjoyed doing he grew to leave the house for a Comic-Con with a fake smile cuz he had to be there, and basically grew his passion into certain kind of animosity towards the end because of everything it has become today! People don't collect comic books like they should anymore only old time collectors have collections people of the youth only buy to get it graded to flip it so that they can buy the next big thing and cover the bills having a collection is something of the past and that is sad it's not for the love of the comic book The Joy of the person buying the comic book that is why comic books died before the pandemic and we're always dead and if we want to see change we're going to have to start fixing the people who are infringing their rights desecrating the comic book so the individual can never sell it, that is wrong people! This is just my opinion on the matter and furthermore my opinion on the matter why is it that you can't give a military discount we fought for your country didn't we I'm on a fixed income can't grade cause it's too overpriced no enjoyment for me I guess that's just my opinion! [[User:Apocalypsegamer|Apocalypsegamer]] ([[User talk:Apocalypsegamer|talk]]) 06:24, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
|